America Votes 2010

[Soxy]

Vacation to Cali: no longer being planned.

 

Big shocker for me of the night was our US Rep Jim Oberstar got ousted. He brought a lot of money back to Duluth (badly needed money)--so we'll have fun when that dries up.

[Balta1701]

If you look at my list, you will see it is mostly Obama caving. And if you read between the lines of the words coming from the GOP establishment (not the Rand Paul's of the world), you will see they are all but signalling that they won't entirely block ACA funding the way you think.

 

 

 

There is every reason to invest right now, if you can. For those businesses and people with the money, they already are investing, because debt is so damn cheap and exports are working better in the currency view. Look at the manufacturing data, and the small business data, over recent months. Its all right there. And for those that can't, well, many of them have already failed, leaving opportunities open for the survivors. This is how pretty much every modern recovery has started.

 

And I don't know what government supports you think are going to be yanked. The GOP is not a bunch of Sharron Angles, despite your characterization. Most of the GOP'ers in Congress are not stupid, and you are not going to get a majority in the house voting for huge, crippling cuts, in the midst of a delicate recovery. Just won't happen.

Suffice to say I disagree with pretty much all of this except for the Obama caving part?

 

Pretty much every modern recovery has been promoted by a substantial rate cut by the Fed to the point that housing investment begins to pick up. That's not going to happen this time. Small business investment is slowly picking up, but that will be substantially hurt if the deficit is cut and the dollar begins to strengthen in response. The Fed thinks that things are going the wrong way enough that QE2 is basically ready to be announced; dumping another $500 or so billion out there.

 

I think you're right that the Republicans wont' care much about debt...but that's because I'd expect that we'll see a $4 trillion or so tax cut package moving by January. That's the one thing that might be enough to push the other way and make large investors stop sitting on their hands.

 

What we will see pretty quick is an end to infrastructure spending, significant cutbacks on unemployment benefits, and much more rapid deterioration of public sector employment (i.e. a lot more teachers, police, and firefighter cutbacks).

 

Oh, and about 3 dozen investigations into the Black Panthers.

 

Edit: This is also the end for a whole lot of clean energy companies and investment, because their tax credits will dry up and they won't be able to compete with the tax credits given to dirty energy.

[NorthSideSox72]

Suffice to say I disagree with pretty much all of this except for the Obama caving part?

 

Pretty much every modern recovery has been promoted by a substantial rate cut by the Fed to the point that housing investment begins to pick up. That's not going to happen this time. Small business investment is slowly picking up, but that will be substantially hurt if the deficit is cut and the dollar begins to strengthen in response. The Fed thinks that things are going the wrong way enough that QE2 is basically ready to be announced; dumping another $500 or so billion out there.

 

I think you're right that the Republicans wont' care much about debt...but that's because I'd expect that we'll see a $4 trillion or so tax cut package moving by January. That's the one thing that might be enough to push the other way and make large investors stop sitting on their hands.

 

What we will see pretty quick is an end to infrastructure spending, significant cutbacks on unemployment benefits, and much more rapid deterioration of public sector employment (i.e. a lot more teachers, police, and firefighter cutbacks).

 

Oh, and about 3 dozen investigations into the Black Panthers.

 

Edit: This is also the end for a whole lot of clean energy companies and investment, because their tax credits will dry up and they won't be able to compete with the tax credits given to dirty energy.

Every major recovery was the result of fed moves and housing build-ups? Seriously? I'd say that happened exactly once, not every time. Housing prices were pretty stable in growth rates until the 90's, when they started to get steeper, but the real big moves didn't start until 2000-2007.

 

Small business investment isn't slowly picking up, look at the data - its picking up at a very high rate. Of course, they were down so far, they have a long way to go. But there is nothing slow about it.

 

A $4T tax cut package? A tax cut package on par with the size of the entire US budget? How can you even say that with a straight face?

 

Infrastructure spending will not end, you are being hyperbolic again. I am sure it will slow down from mid-Stimulus bill levels though.

 

I could care less how many investigations they do, that's all a distraction really.

 

The only thing you say here that may come true, probably will, is a ramping down of alt energy funding, which I agree is stupid.

 

--

 

Your post, in general, reflects something I am seeing a lot of, and its disturbing. People are looking at things that happened recently, and assuming that all of history has been that way. But that simply isn't the case. An extreme example is the idiots who said after 2008 that the GOP was dead. Seriously? Have these people ever read any history books? Things fluctuate, politically and financially, its reality and its inevitable.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

Balta, I think you should be more of a sore loser. Seriously, you sound like the 9 year old that just lost his little league baseball game to the other side.

 

I fully expect there to be some gridlock in Washington. But you know, if this election showed us anything, it's that people don't like representatives that do nothing. So I think some things will get done and we'll be in a better position in 2 years for it. Much like in 2004 for the Dems, the GOP can't be the complaining party anymore. Ultimately they have 50% of the responsibility for whatever gets passed in the next two years, which IMO is the best scenario.

[Balta1701]

I fully expect there to be some gridlock in Washington. But you know, if this election showed us anything, it's that people don't like representatives that do nothing. So I think some things will get done and we'll be in a better position in 2 years for it. Much like in 2004 for the Dems, the GOP can't be the complaining party anymore. Ultimately they have 50% of the responsibility for whatever gets passed in the next two years, which IMO is the best scenario.

WTF? They don't like when their representatives do nothing?

 

This has been one of the most productive Congresses in terms of passing legislation in decades. You have to go back to Johnson's first term to see a Congress that did this many major bills.

 

You can look at it 2 ways. You can either tell me that the Dems totally overreached, or you can tell me that the Dems didn't go nearly far enough, but if people don't like representatives that do nothing, then they'd have loved this Congress.

[Jenksismyhero]

WTF? They don't like when their representatives do nothing?

 

This has been one of the most productive Congresses in terms of passing legislation in decades. You have to go back to Johnson's first term to see a Congress that did this many major bills.

 

You can look at it 2 ways. You can either tell me that the Dems totally overreached, or you can tell me that the Dems didn't go nearly far enough, but if people don't like representatives that do nothing, then they'd have loved this Congress.

 

passing legislation and productive are two different things.

[NorthSideSox72]

passing legislation and productive are two different things.

Eh, on this part, I agree with Balta. This wasn't about people not wanting their reps and senators to do nothing - if it was, they sure as heck wouldn't have voted so heavily GOP, who were (as you noted) the party of NO.

 

It was about the economy being bad, and about the things Congress DID do, not aligning with their vision of what TO do.

 

[Balta1701]

Every major recovery was the result of fed moves and housing build-ups? Seriously? I'd say that happened exactly once, not every time. Housing prices were pretty stable in growth rates until the 90's, when they started to get steeper, but the real big moves didn't start until 2000-2007.

 

Small business investment isn't slowly picking up, look at the data - its picking up at a very high rate. Of course, they were down so far, they have a long way to go. But there is nothing slow about it.

 

A $4T tax cut package? A tax cut package on par with the size of the entire US budget? How can you even say that with a straight face?

 

Infrastructure spending will not end, you are being hyperbolic again. I am sure it will slow down from mid-Stimulus bill levels though.

 

I could care less how many investigations they do, that's all a distraction really.

 

The only thing you say here that may come true, probably will, is a ramping down of alt energy funding, which I agree is stupid.

 

--

 

Your post, in general, reflects something I am seeing a lot of, and its disturbing. People are looking at things that happened recently, and assuming that all of history has been that way. But that simply isn't the case. An extreme example is the idiots who said after 2008 that the GOP was dead. Seriously? Have these people ever read any history books? Things fluctuate, politically and financially, its reality and its inevitable.

Every tax cut number since 2001 has been given on a 10 year basis. If you simply extend the Bush Tax cuts, it is a $4 trillion package. The Middle class portion of it is about $800 billion-$1 trillion, the capital gains taxes, estate taxes, and upper class tax cuts are a $3 trillion/10 year package. That's simple.

 

Infrastructure spending won't end completely, but let me put it this way...even at "stimulus" levels, it's not enough to keep up with what the nation actually needs. We're 30 years behind in infrastructure spending, to the tune of about $2 trillion, give or take your preferred estimate, and we're going to have substantial national cutbacks in that, to the point that for all practical purposes we're not spending anything. Furthermore...state level infrastructure spending is going to plummet because it won't be federally supported.

 

Finally, on the housing market...no, it's not just the last bubble that was supported by housing market recovery...housing market recovery is usually one of the driving forces in recoveries because housing investment tends to respond quite readily to the actions of the Fed on interest rates. Significant interest rate cuts usually perk up residential investment and wind up being a driving force in recoveries. There are many volumes written on the correlation between housing investment and recoveries. Until this cycle, that has been a strong driving force in recovery. This cycle is the unique one.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

Let me clarify. In saying that they were angry that their representatives "did nothing," I meant that the people sent people to office to accomplish certain tasks (i.e., create jobs, fix the economy, get us back on the right path). Those people in office did not do those things, thus, they were replaced. I tend to think the electorate is not only dumb, but also slow in reacting to bad policy. To me, this "tidal wave" of reaction surprised me. The people gave their representatives a shorter leash because they didn't feel like anything was done to solve the problems they felt most pressing (the economy).

 

 

[HuskyCaucasian]

To me, how the Republicans won the house is simple:

Do everything you can in your power to completely obstruct the political desires of the opposition (democrats), scream bloody murder that the system is broken (even though you were the ones breaking it), say that if you are elected/re-elected you will fight for real Americans (while being the back pockets of big business), and continue to do everything in your power to completely obstruct the political desires of the opposition to the point where absolutely NO legislation to fix the economy is passed, there by sinking the President, and getting your man (or woman) in there in 2012.

 

See, it's that simple.

[Balta1701]

Let me clarify. In saying that they were angry that their representatives "did nothing," I meant that the people sent people to office to accomplish certain tasks (i.e., create jobs, fix the economy, get us back on the right path). Those people in office did not do those things, thus, they were replaced. I tend to think the electorate is not only dumb, but also slow in reacting to bad policy. To me, this "tidal wave" of reaction surprised me. The people gave their representatives a shorter leash because they didn't feel like anything was done to solve the problems they felt most pressing (the economy).

We're going to disagree on the causes...but overall I agree...the people are going to be angry and disappointed as long as there is nearly 10% unemployment.

 

I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a similar bloodbath in 2012 going the other way for exactly that reason, because I don't see any signs that we're going to get the kind of GDP growth (4-5% annual) that it would take to start eating into that number. 2-3% GDP growth = steady unemployment.

 

Even if business investment does start to pick up, it's going to have years of drag in the housing market, eroding skills of long-term unemployed workers, and huge cuts in government employment to overcome. That's exactly where we've sat for the last 8 months or so.

[Cknolls]

I think the biggest story last night was the absolute obliteration of the Dems in the state races. The D's are a two coast party and nothing more.

[BigSqwert]

I think the biggest story last night was the absolute obliteration of the Dems in the state races. The D's are a two coast party and nothing more.

So you're saying that Dems do well where 80% of the country's population lies?

[Jenksismyhero]

To me, how the Republicans won the house is simple:

Do everything you can in your power to completely obstruct the political desires of the opposition (democrats), scream bloody murder that the system is broken (even though you were the ones breaking it), say that if you are elected/re-elected you will fight for real Americans (while being the back pockets of big business), and continue to do everything in your power to completely obstruct the political desires of the opposition to the point where absolutely NO legislation to fix the economy is passed, there by sinking the President, and getting your man (or woman) in there in 2012.

 

See, it's that simple.

 

Ugh, this is such crap. In a system designed with two parties with opposing views, is it really a surprise that one party opposes everything the other party does? Gimme a break. The GOP the last few years has been more obnoxious than at any other RECENT time, I'll give you that, but I refuse to believe that they're the worst ever or that they've done anything THAT extreme. Take away 9/11 and i'm 100% positive that the dems from 2000-2008 would have opposed every single measure the GOP brought to the table (they did in the end, they couldn't in the beginning because their hands were basically tied).

 

You're basically saying "people that don't agree with Obama blocked progress." Well guess what, not everyone agrees that the stimulus was needed and/or good policy, not everyone agrees that his particular health care reform bill was the health care reform we needed. So i'm happy that "my" party (the one that most accurately represents the majority of my views, since god knows what the "democratic party" actually stands for) didn't go along with it.

 

And are you really that blind to think that the dems aren't the back pockets for business? That's just hilarious. Ever hear of unions? They're politicians. To get into office you have to sell your soul to big business. GMAFB on that point.

[Jenksismyhero]

We're going to disagree on the causes...but overall I agree...the people are going to be angry and disappointed as long as there is nearly 10% unemployment.

 

I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a similar bloodbath in 2012 going the other way for exactly that reason, because I don't see any signs that we're going to get the kind of GDP growth (4-5% annual) that it would take to start eating into that number. 2-3% GDP growth = steady unemployment.

 

Even if business investment does start to pick up, it's going to have years of drag in the housing market, eroding skills of long-term unemployed workers, and huge cuts in government employment to overcome. That's exactly where we've sat for the last 8 months or so.

 

I don't see how this is true. You have a 50/50 Congress. Either they all sink together or they all get something accomplished. Either way, there won't be an entire country pissed that the party in power "did nothing" despite having 2 years to do it, because there is no one party in power who takes all the responsibility. Obama might be the scapegoat, but not anyone in Congress.

[StrangeSox]

Going by obstructionist measure counts, yeah, they're the worst. By a long shot.

 

edit: The point of two political parties isn't for the minority party to break Congress as much as possible so nothing gets done. Or, at least it shouldn't be, if you want a functional government.

Edited November 3, 2010 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

Going by obstructionist measure counts, yeah, they're the worst. By a long shot.

 

edit: The point of two political parties isn't for the minority party to break Congress as much as possible so nothing gets done. Or, at least it shouldn't be, if you want a functional government.

 

So, Balta is claiming they're the most productive Congress since Johnson, you guys are claiming they weren't able to get anything done because the GOP somehow stopped them. Which is it?

[StrangeSox]

I don't see how this is true. You have a 50/50 Congress. Either they all sink together or they all get something accomplished. Either way, there won't be an entire country pissed that the party in power "did nothing" despite having 2 years to do it, because there is no one party in power who takes all the responsibility. Obama might be the scapegoat, but not anyone in Congress.

 

I agree with what you're saying here.

 

Two years, no improvement? Blame it on the Democrat President and Senate. Not enough time to fix all the bad policies enacted in 2009 and 2010.

 

Two years, economic recovery? Pat yourself on the back, that watershed election in 2010 was the turning point. Without the courageous Republicans, we'd be over 10% unemployment!

 

I'd say the Democrats would do the same, but they're generally too weak, ineffectual and just bad at messaging.

[StrangeSox]

So, Balta is claiming they're the most productive Congress since Johnson, you guys are claiming they weren't able to get anything done because the GOP somehow stopped them. Which is it?

 

They were able to get a lot done because of the strong majorities they had. That doesn't change how hard the Republican minorities in both sides of Congress tried to block just about every single thing.

 

Seriously, this is easily quantifiable. This article is from last March. Since they lost control in 2006, they've more than doubled previous obstruction measures.

 

[StrangeSox]

Also there will be no African Americans in the next Senate.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20021572-503544.html

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

They were able to get a lot done because of the strong majorities they had. That doesn't change how hard the Republican minorities in both sides of Congress tried to block just about every single thing.

 

Seriously, this is easily quantifiable. This article is from last March. Since they lost control in 2006, they've more than doubled previous obstruction measures.

 

Given the circumstances and the clear opposing views on how to fix the problem, wouldn't you expect the GOP to fight back with what little power they had?

 

[StrangeSox]

Given the circumstances and the clear opposing views on how to fix the problem, wouldn't you expect the GOP to fight back with what little power they had?

 

I would expect the GOP to break government and try to paint it as a good thing, yes. I would expect them to be belligerent if the Dems did half of what they did. Oh, wait, they were....

 

Minority caucuses aren't there to break government by abusing parliamentary rules.

[KipWellsFan]

I think the biggest story last night was the absolute obliteration of the Dems in the state races. The D's are a two coast party and nothing more.

 

Yah... and the Republicans are the party of old white people and nothing more...

 

Good to see Michael Bennett win in Colorado. From what I've seen the guy doesn't seem like a complete tool, and it's always good to see homophobes like Ken Buck take it on the chin. The Dems must have a pretty strong team on the ground in Colorado.

[NorthSideSox72]

I think the biggest story last night was the absolute obliteration of the Dems in the state races. The D's are a two coast party and nothing more.

That's about the same as saying the GOP is a regional party of the South, which many said after 2008. Neither are true.

 

[Rex Kickass]

Tea Partier GOP Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann had a victory party last night. It wasn't in the district she represents.